The Sony A73/A7R3/A7S3/A9 Thread

Agree on the A7R4. I think it has more to come as the A9 did, specifically in terms of the AF tracking. And unless I've missed it the ability to set exposure lengths down to the second as on the 5DIV wouldn't go amiss.

Canon of course still interest me having previously spent 8 years using their gear and the RF mount lenses look exceptional, though I'm guessing the supertele prices will be cold sweat inducing. Agree on that colour science, as soon as I saw the first image of the girl on the Canon it just looked right.

Raymond Lin said:
Actually, I don't think there will be a new A7S3, the A73 can do very good video already so I really don't think they will split the line like that anymore. It would make more sense to make the A74 to pack more punches.

As for cost, if you think it makes no sense financially to switch system, it makes even less sense to do it as a business. Because the client won't know what camera you are using or they care really. When I go to meetings I don't bring my gear, I bring albums. I am judged on my photos, not my gear. So if the camera is not going to give you a technical advantage in a way that can capture images that you can't do for your line of work, there is no financial reason to switch. There is financial reason to stay put.

Which is why I switched, the A73 has a significant advantage over DSLR in terms of Eye-AF, my keep rate is much higher with the Sony than with the Canon so it made sense. The R5 need to offer something on that level for me to switch.
Click to expand...
 
I only ever shot Canon before Sony, I found the colours between 5D2/3/4 fairly consistent, but I did notice a tweak between 2 to 3. Some reason my head just like Canon's colours, a lot of the time isn't about how accurate it is, but how nice it is. But we all have to switch mount from EF anyway and the EF stuff prices were plummeting when i sold mine, I suspect it would be even more so now with people selling theirs off either to upgrade or simply needed the money.
 
Raymond Lin said:
There will never be a perfect camera, and honestly those points above are quite minor if you look at it from 10 years ago.

p.s. I don’t shoot video so overheating and bitrate is not a concern at all for me. OS and menu although crap…I made custom menus so work around that, however the colour science part I can get on board with, perhaps my eyes is used to the Canon, I just like it more. That said…I once watched a video on YouTube someone made with a Canon/Sony/Fuji shooting the same thing side by side and you pick which one you prefer, I think I ended up picking the Sony in a blind test...
Click to expand...


Sure, if you've managed to make Sony work for you its good. But for someone new dipping in, I wouldn't go for a camera band just based on the body-price being better value for money over build quality, ergonomics, feature set, lens quality etc.
 
aoaaron said:
Sure, if you've managed to make Sony work for you its good. But for someone new dipping in, I wouldn't go for a camera band just based on the body-price being better value for money over build quality, ergonomics, feature set, lens quality etc.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I can make any modern camera work for me. The question for me isn't if i can make it work, but whether it fits into the workflow the smoothest way possible. If I had still on 5D4, I could transition slowly one by one, but I suspect even if I sold both 5D4, it wouldn't be enough for 1 R5 body.

If you are starting from scratch, it depends what your budget is, if it is a tight budget, Canon RF mount sure does look scary.
 
Last edited:
I had the A7Riii and eos r at the same time and I used the canon more. I recently moved to the A7Riv which if im honest has been dissapointing for me but I think most of that is down to the focus being dire with the 200-600. Just the feel and layout of the canon was much better as were the colours but the AF while better than the 5D4 is like a dinosaur. The R5 was announced just after i sold up my canon stuff which was annoying but it will easily be an A7iii killer if not A7iv killer IF the specs and price are right. Something tells me £4k though.
 
tatts said:
I had the A7Riii and eos r at the same time and I used the canon more. I recently moved to the A7Riv which if im honest has been dissapointing for me but I think most of that is down to the focus being dire with the 200-600. Just the feel and layout of the canon was much better as were the colours but the AF while better than the 5D4 is like a dinosaur. The R5 was announced just after i sold up my canon stuff which was annoying but it will easily be an A7iii killer if not A7iv killer IF the specs and price are right. Something tells me £4k though.
Click to expand...
The colours are better on sony, more natural and raw whilst the canon colours are pre cooked.

The canon cameras also have worse AF and much worse lens lineup that is small in terms of quantity and very expensive.

Moving to canon is such a downgrade. no idea why a working pro would!
 
jonneymendoza said:
The colours are better on sony, more natural and raw whilst the canon colours are pre cooked.

The canon cameras also have worse AF and much worse lens lineup that is small in terms of quantity and very expensive.

Moving to canon is such a downgrade. no idea why a working pro would!
Click to expand...

Spoken like a true Sony fanboy ;)

I have heavily invested in the Sony FE system and still completely disagree with just about everything you’ve said there.
 
Spleen Sauce said:
Spoken like a true Sony fanboy ;)

I have heavily invested in the Sony FE system and still completely disagree with just about everything you’ve said there.
Click to expand...
haha .

well even if canon did have exact same lineup and af/camera feature/performance as sony, why would u dump all your sony gear or vice versa to swap as a side step?

The only reason i switched from canon was mirrorless tech, next time i would switch would be for global shuter some other epic next gen tech next in line for photograpy.

Its like theold dslr canon vs nikon. pretty much on par and anyone who switched from one side of the other saw hardly any imrpovements etc. side step and you cant go wrong with either
 
Last edited:
jonneymendoza said:
haha .

well even if canon did have exact same lineup and af/camera feature/performance as sony, why would u dump all your sony gear or vice versa to swap as a side step?

The only reason i switched from canon was mirrorless tech, next time i would switch would be for global shuter some other epic next gen tech next in line for photograpy.

Its like theold dslr canon vs nikon. pretty much on par and anyone who switched from one side of the other saw hardly any imrpovements etc. side step and you cant go wrong with either
Click to expand...

I agree, switching systems when you're already heavily invested is never a smart move unless its for a colossal reason. My point was more around your comments on Canon's colours and autofocus, and it being a downgrade which I don't think is the case. It's not an upgrade, but certainly not a downgrade. Personally I think most decent photographers will get excellent results with any system that they choose, all of them are so good these days.
 
Some of you really do go a bit OTT on the ol' camera gear comparisons! :p

People spend £1000s on top notch gear and still think something is crap and rubbish because its 2 years old,and here I am thinking if I had some of that gear,I probably wouldn't be changing for years. Maybe people need to enjoy what they have - compared to the film gear I remember having,most of this digital gear is lightyears ahead in ease of use and capability. You honestly need to be a totally lazy photographer, if you can't get good pictures out of most of the highend dSLRs/mirrorless cameras you can buy now. Tried so many of the newer systems out,they are all really nice pieces of equipment.

Even though I have a fairly newish Fuji for when I am on holidays,my main setup is an ancient D600 with a 10 year old Sigma telephoto lens,which will be blown away by any of the modern equivalents. I use it at airshows,which is really taxing on the AF,yet despite wanting to get a newer setup for a while,I got some of my best airshow pictures through working around the limitations of the gear and better pre-shot preparation. One day I will upgrade(hopefully).
 
Last edited:
jonneymendoza said:
The colours are better on sony, more natural and raw whilst the canon colours are pre cooked.

The canon cameras also have worse AF and much worse lens lineup that is small in terms of quantity and very expensive.

Moving to canon is such a downgrade. no idea why a working pro would!
Click to expand...

I think you're the only person ever to have said this about sony colours, maybe its your eyes or your monitor isn't calibrated?
The RF lenses are better than the FE so don't kid yourself but there's more to a camera than just specs. The eos r was comfier to shoot and a lot easier to use, the sony is still a little on the small size and doesn't have the best button layout or menus. as for AF, the A7R4 + 200-600 = a joke. If sony doesn't fix this before the R5 I will be switching.
Spleen Sauce said:
Spoken like a true Sony fanboy ;)

I have heavily invested in the Sony FE system and still completely disagree with just about everything you’ve said there.
Click to expand...
I agree. Not sure why some people are like this.
 
jonneymendoza said:
The colours are better on sony, more natural and raw whilst the canon colours are pre cooked.

The canon cameras also have worse AF and much worse lens lineup that is small in terms of quantity and very expensive.

Moving to canon is such a downgrade. no idea why a working pro would!
Click to expand...


Totally disagree. Canon colours are nicer, OOTC more pleasing and nicer to edit too even RAW there are clear issues if you want a Sony image to match what a canon RAW can produce.

Autofocus wise, DPAF is nuts and far more natural, especially for video. Sony AF is very 'snappy' and not very cinematic at all at times. Sony eye AF is a bit more accurate than Canon's but Canon's can see through glasses which Sony can't.

Where Canon have historically always gone wrong is there feature set in cameras has been gimped. With their newest announcement, they've fixed that. They also IMO have poorer low light performance than Sony (but Sony are god tier for it).

Sony's issues have been a lack of a flip screen, lagging colour science, overheating issues, poor ergonomics for the body, poorer durability of the bodie, audiojack/general build quality issues, poor software menus, missing key normal features at launch which other cameras have (like time lapse). Sony's with the a9 are better for sports tho.


I definitely wouldn't say Canon are a downgrade. The quality of the glass and bodies are a tier above Sony. Its really obvious just by holding them.

Sony's lens lineup is better for sure. But Canon's will get better with time and probably overtake Sony eventually just like in DSLR land.
 
aoaaron said:
Totally disagree. Canon colours are nicer, OOTC more pleasing and nicer to edit too even RAW there are clear issues if you want a Sony image to match what a canon RAW can produce.

Autofocus wise, DPAF is nuts and far more natural, especially for video. Sony AF is very 'snappy' and not very cinematic at all at times. Sony eye AF is a bit more accurate than Canon's but Canon's can see through glasses which Sony can't.

Where Canon have historically always gone wrong is there feature set in cameras has been gimped. With their newest announcement, they've fixed that. They also IMO have poorer low light performance than Sony (but Sony are god tier for it).

Sony's issues have been a lack of a flip screen, lagging colour science, overheating issues, poor ergonomics for the body, poorer durability of the bodie, audiojack/general build quality issues, poor software menus, missing key normal features at launch which other cameras have (like time lapse). Sony's with the a9 are better for sports tho.


I definitely wouldn't say Canon are a downgrade. The quality of the glass and bodies are a tier above Sony. Its really obvious just by holding them.

Sony's lens lineup is better for sure. But Canon's will get better with time and probably overtake Sony eventually just like in DSLR land.
Click to expand...
Highly disagree with your post. Too many flaws for me to type on the my phone replying to this
 
jonneymendoza said:
Nope, it's been proven that side by side pic's of Sony and canon, most chose Sony in a blind test
Click to expand...


I've seen the youtube videos which explored this which I assume you're alluding to by 'blind tests'. Wouldn't say its 'proven' by a couple of youtubers doing a poll.

I can pull up a fair few videos which would negate that, alongside the general concensus in the photography community that Canon have the better colour science.

Video wise especially, I find Sony really falls apart compared to Canon (outside of Dyanmic range).
 
aoaaron said:
I've seen the youtube videos which explored this which I assume you're alluding to by 'blind tests'. Wouldn't say its 'proven' by a couple of youtubers doing a poll.

I can pull up a fair few videos which would negate that, alongside the general concensus in the photography community that Canon have the better colour science.

Video wise especially, I find Sony really falls apart compared to Canon (outside of Dyanmic range).
Click to expand...
It's not YouTubers voting, it's you and I and other folk's that do.

A blind test showed that many couldn't tell which one was canon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom